57139 réponses à ce sujet

[Falar]

Tailen wrote...

Pelleran wrote...

variobunz wrote...

That's true. BW wanted to create memorable ending that sticks with you.
But the problem is it's not memorable because it's amazing. It's controversy.

True. This is what made me believe in that they have an ace up their sleeves. I just don't get to wrap my head around the fact that Bioware might actually want to be remembered for controversy.

I think it's amazing and controversial.  Why can't it be both?

My opinion is that the ending as it stands now could not have had the desired impact if it was handled any differently.  I have felt very strongly that their intentions were to find a way to make us feel exactly the struggle that Shepard would be feeling.  To face down indoctrination, to make the choice like it was our own, to see that choice play out and actually feel the weight of your decision.

It sounds good on paper -- in fact, it sounds an awful lot like the "signifigance of player choice" mantra we always hear from BioWare with their games -- but has it ever really had this kind of impact?  Has it ever really made you feel?

That being my opinion, I was delighted to bump in to this little tidbit from Casey Hudson:

We end up exploring some spaces that maybe have never been done before. Because interactive storytelling is still kind of new, there are neat things to try. One of the things we’re trying in Mass Effect 3 is the idea that we can let you feel something that is part of that character’s experience versus strictly getting you to react to things that you see and experience. We’re trying to tell a little bit of the story Shepard would feel and seeing if the player feels that as well. You saw that on the Earth mission, and you see it throughout the game. It’s insight into how Shepard feels. I think that’s going to be one of the things people remember.

That came from here: http://www.gameinfor...PostPageIndex=2 

Now, I mentioned above "the ending as it stands now".  He mentions in the quote that there are "neat things to try" because "interactive storytelling is still kind of new".  I really think a big part of that is having the ability to break the mold, and leave a cliffhanger (my word of choice here -- others clearly say "unsatisfying and riddled with plot holes") for a brief period.  Long enough, say, to get crazy amounts of attention and unite their raging fanbase against them.  Bold move.

And then -- via a free DLC, or time-locked content, or a 20 minute cinematic, or whatever means they've had planned all along -- give us the answer we're all waiting for with bated breath.

I love the indoctrination theory.  I fully support it, and it leaves me satisfied with the state of the ending for my Shepard's story.  I would be fine without any further explanation, or even any real confirmation.

However, I think what looks crazy to everyone now is going to end up setting a major precident in storytelling.  I think they're breaking the mold, and I wouldn't be surprised in the least to have the rest of the ending opened up to us shortly.

TL;DR -- Without the turn that it took and the lack of traditional closure, it never could have had this impact.  It never would have made us feel.

Brilliant. I agree completely, and thank you for bringing it all up.

I actually think Bioware is trying to do some amazing storytelling -- I think DA2 was an attempt at a Brechtian alienation to get us to think about the story from a perspective outside of Hawke's. And I think the ending of ME3 is an attempt to fully immerse us in Shepard's mind -- and your quote from Hudson fits that perfectly. It's cool to find someone who agrees with me at least about ME3.

Modifié par Falar, 14 mars 2012 - 01:45 .

[MatthewGold]

Dessalines wrote...

I spent money on expensive five course dinner, and ended ui getting a tapeworm that had to be removed through surgery. I got Bioware

I think you can take medication for that these days.

[Syphirr]

Goikiu wrote...

 There is another issue about the end and the "theory".

If you think about it ME2 have got the same identical engine (and grafhic engine) of the ME3.
So, same identical engine, same dimension (for xbox 2 full dvds).
But... if i recall it correctly.... ME2 have got 2 mission special for each squad member outside the first two (miranda and jacob) as in ME3 you got Ashley/Kaidan and Vega. The others have got two mission each, one for finding, one for thrust.
ME2 has a lot of cerberus mission too and mission you can take scanning some planet.
and ME2 have a long mission story.

ME3 is too short.
We're talking about 7 or 10 N7 mission right?
Plus some little mission if you've got some dlc before, like Kasumi or Zaeed. But nothing more... and so, you got a story mission who isn't really that long... so we're missing something o_0 a lot i'd say.

(As ya know i'm not English so try to understand me) 

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think they only have the same engines in the case of the PS3.

Another thing to consider is that although there appeared to be a lot more content in 2 in your opinion, a lot of the enviroments were re-used (although obviously not to the same extent as ME1)

[Phobius9]

Tailen wrote...

TL;DR -- Without the turn that it took and the lack of traditional closure, it never could have had this impact.  It never would have made us feel.

This.

[Dessalines]

gunneybobbysosay wrote...

in my game, as it happened I got these endings.....and they are just as real as the ones made up here...

"The sad ending" first...1st Ending no spoilers ALLIANCE command says it's to late, Liara tells Sheppard that she's pregnant, then Liara tells Shepard she is leaving him for her true love the illusive man and they were riding off into paradise together...as the council orders me as specter in charge transform the Normandy into a nursery as i have a new assignment nurse/baby Krogan duty for life should not have melded in the genophage, now fear of indoctrinated krogan babies hundreds of them or more beyond count and I am stuck on the Normandy with them all....

Next play threw...
2nd Ending No Spoilers: (Upon my second play through I got the "The Scooby-Doo ending..."
Anderson pulls off the man size Harbingers face mask to reveal the Illusive man aka old man winters, trying to scare everyone away from the citadel amusement park so he could but it and put in a mall...he used smoke and mirrors and a old time projector to fool us in to thinking their was a monster around and then the illusive man shouted "I would have got away with too it if it wasn't for Sheppard’s and those damn kids!!!"

my last play threw...
3rd play through I finally got The Mega-Happy ending...we won now usher in a new age of peace and tranquility for all and also i am a giant celebrity movie recording artist star now 10,000,000,000 Shepard fans cant be wrong...my rewards begin with the council announced Starting tomorrow, my fem Shep has a six album multi-Billion dollar recording reality show contract with a two picture vid deal for any movie I want the lead role in...Vegas baby Vegas! thus i T.C.B. in a flash and live it up "King" style baby unHuh...well that's what i got out of the ending anyway...cheers!

Lol, you posted  this already

[ArkkAngel007]

One huge problem...they say it was half-***ed because of the leak. The ending is the same as the script that was leaked. The game we received is the same think aside from some VERY minor changes here and there.

It doesn't add up.

[Bourne Endeavor]

Anthraxius Omega wrote...

A few hours ago an anonymous user who leaked the multiplayer DLC (just an hour earlier) has claimed that the ending fiasco was deliberate because of the game’s storyline being leaked. They changed it so they could have more time to prepare the real ending DLC.

It is called “The Truth”, and will be released in April or May… You will be able to continue your story if you picked any of the endings. Your decision during the sequence will have a big effect on the ending of The Truth. Also, The Truth adds two new sets of enemies, new classes, and multiplayer maps, including “Firebase Hive”, which is a small area of the last remaining Collector Ship included in the DLC, which, by the way, you should definitely bring Javik the Prothean along if you have them.

The following picture shows some of the leaked multiplayer classes and races. One race that isn’t shown is the Prothean Adept and Vanguard. This DLC also, enables the ability for owners of the preorder and From Ashes DLC to find their DLC weapons in reinforcement packs.

All of that content, and this might as well be labelled an expansion.

And it’s Free!

If this is indeed true, then BioWare will certainly be remembered. Frankly, I cannot cite a company who has ever taken such a risk. Not charging for the DLC is a guaranteed way to rekindle fan delight because even if the ending is patched. People would be a little miffed to pay for a proper ending, even if they would still do so. With the leak, this would be beyond amazing from BioWare. Perhaps, I am optimistic but it has alone reinvested me into playing the series. I have been meaning to start from ME1 to ME3, as I have yet to finish ME3. So this might just mean I have a few hundred hours to lose on multiple playthroughs. 

It may all be for naught but considering how letdown I felt over the series. It's a nice turn of events regardless of the legitimacy.

[Anthraxius Omega]

I am wondering about the implementation as well.

Could you be turned against your comarades? Or is Shepard lost, you suddendly play James AGAINST Shepard? I am really excited, and for me, i am sure that there is a real closure coming up: The Truth.

[Goikiu]

Syphirr wrote...

Goikiu wrote...

 There is another issue about the end and the "theory".

If you think about it ME2 have got the same identical engine (and grafhic engine) of the ME3.
So, same identical engine, same dimension (for xbox 2 full dvds).
But... if i recall it correctly.... ME2 have got 2 mission special for each squad member outside the first two (miranda and jacob) as in ME3 you got Ashley/Kaidan and Vega. The others have got two mission each, one for finding, one for thrust.
ME2 has a lot of cerberus mission too and mission you can take scanning some planet.
and ME2 have a long mission story.

ME3 is too short.
We're talking about 7 or 10 N7 mission right?
Plus some little mission if you've got some dlc before, like Kasumi or Zaeed. But nothing more... and so, you got a story mission who isn't really that long... so we're missing something o_0 a lot i'd say.

(As ya know i'm not English so try to understand me) 

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think they only have the same engines in the case of the PS3.

Another thing to consider is that although there appeared to be a lot more content in 2 in your opinion, a lot of the enviroments were re-used (although obviously not to the same extent as ME1)

You need to pay attention to a lot of things.
As far as i know about gaming programming a Graphic Engine isn't something you change every games. It request a lot of money/time to be made and if you look about cinematic/dialogue they (me2 and me3) feel the same. They've untouched the HUD (weapon circle and power circle). They've changed some little thing in the general hud like how they show you Health and Granades.
The texture are generally changed, but not the Engine (as far as i know).
ME2 have surely got a lot more of missions but not ME3... as far as i can remember ME2 has more quest (planet you got missions) but most of em are shorter. With ME3 you got less missions but longer.

It's hard to see really if something is hidden or not... so i'm thinking about it.
Yes i can be completly wrong but we need to survive throught this... (this topic and this moment whit no info from BW). 

Ah, about the mini-game.
in ME3 you got the planet searching object mini-game.
Within ME2 you got the planet searching resources plus hacking and bypassing mini-game.

ME1 have the same as ME2 but resources where a lot different. 

[Mixon]

Just one question. Why ppl who like bad ending - got it, but ppl who like happy ending didn't get it?

[JulienJaden]

variobunz wrote...

"We have some really great multiplayer content and some really great single-player content coming over the air and their feedback will become part of how we design that," Hudson added.

Interseting.

Is that so, Casey? Well, our feedback is this: Give us what you, personally, word for word, promised: An ending that takes our choices into account, rather than A, B, C. That's your promise.
Stop dancing around the issue and give us clear answers. Either you lied (if so, admit it) or you're trolling us now.
Either way, come clean with us, cause, quite frankly, I don't think that fans who can't overlook the major plotholes (you can't euphemize them as 'mystery' when their sheer size says "laziness" or "bull****") will be willing to buy Bioware games in the future, if odds are that the endings are just a kick in the teeth and that they can't rely on anything you guys say. If you people keep at this, I can guarantee (with nothing more than the common sense you hold in such high esteem to back me up) that piracy numbers will rise faster than you can say "economic disaster".

So, again: Stop this and give us a clear answer. Don't treat your fans like garbage or they will most certainly return the favor.

[Revalations92]

I still think the message from Ash has some relavence. There's no way its from her in the hospital, or from the first mission. The way its worded makes me think its post ending.

And why in the hell would bioware release this if it didnt add to the game in a significant way? I mean they're making its release a pretty big deal.

And to those who downloaded it then replayed the ending, I think you need to play it from the start to get this message.

Modifié par Revalations92, 14 mars 2012 - 01:58 .

[ixcruz]

Phobius9 wrote...



Then there's the fact that the game dumps you back on-board the Normandy. How will the DLC activate once you've downloaded it? Click on 'Resume' and you get a message saying "Hey, wanna see how the game really ends lolololol?!?"?

Don't get me wrong, I have everything crossed for a DLC to finish the fight, but I'd be interested in people's thoughts as to how it will be implemented.

I'm guessing they'll make you play-through the final London mission (since you can restart the final mission by loading), do everything as you did before (or even change your mind) and the 'true' ending will kick off after that. 

[Wisnoe]

I do think it was a hallucination, but a couple of pointers towards the Destroy ending as the only viable, i.e. free of indoctrination.

I only read to page 75, so bear with me if these points are already made.

The reason Shepard still breathes after Destroy option, is because it's the only option in which Shepard chooses to live, the other two choices have him/her sacrifice him/herself, so it is illogical to have a breathing Shepard when choosing for Control/Synthesis after you sacrifice yourself, regardless of indoctrination. The EMS is important here, to have enough forces to combat the Reapers and have enough time to send a rescue squad or something.

However, I do have a question about the three options. He child says the solution (Reapers coming every 50000 years to clean sweep the Galaxy for advanced races) doesn't work anymore since the Crucible is built and an organic has found the catalyst.
He then proceeds that the Crucible gives new options for a solution. The choices you make depend on your EMS and Galactic Readiness etc.
However, he says the cycle will end after he mentions the Synthesis option.
My question: Does he mean the cycle will end regardless which of the three options I choose, or does he mean the cycle will only end if I choose for Synthesis? I thought the last one and went for Synthesis to end the cycle of destruction.
My Shepard wanted to stop the Reapers, not necessarily destroy them.

[Pelleran]

Tailen wrote...

Pelleran wrote...

variobunz wrote...

That's true. BW wanted to create memorable ending that sticks with you.
But the problem is it's not memorable because it's amazing. It's controversy.

True. This is what made me believe in that they have an ace up their sleeves. I just don't get to wrap my head around the fact that Bioware might actually want to be remembered for controversy.

I think it's amazing and controversial.  Why can't it be both?

While I do understand what you are saying with your post, Tailen, what I meant is the following. Bioware is actually a story-telling company as much as they are game designers. I really like them for that. I find their approach to the Mass Effect series is interesting. I like their claim they had the entire story with all twists down at the very beginning.

Now, taking this into consideration - no matter whether the BW officials lied to a game magazine in an interview or not (I actually would find THAT more frustrating than them leaving ME 3 as it is) - I do not think Bioware wants to be remembered as the great controversy.

As things are now, Mass Effect 3 is amazing and controversial, as the 400+ pages in this thread prove. I am fully with you on that.

I just hope that they do not want to go down in history as the company that drove their fans into fits of berserker rage by "outsourcing the last 10 minutes of script to Mr. Trollface" to use the words of another user here.

[RazorrX]

I feel that due to the way it has been released in waves that the best business decision for Bioware/EA would be to actually state something more than "if they only knew . . . "

But yes, I believe that all the incongruencies were done on purpose in order to hint that it was not really happening. There are too many things that do not make sense that goes beyond the whole 'rushed' thing. It had to be done on purpose and it had to be done with a reason. I think the DLC/Expansion will pick up with you waking up on earth having NOT gone to visit creepy star kid.

[RazorrX]

RazorrX wrote...

I feel that due to the way it has been released in waves that the best business decision for Bioware/EA would be to actually state something more than "if they only knew . . . "

But yes, I believe that all the incongruencies were done on purpose in order to hint that it was not really happening. There are too many things that do not make sense that goes beyond the whole 'rushed' thing. It had to be done on purpose and it had to be done with a reason. I think the DLC/Expansion will pick up with you waking up on earth having NOT gone to visit creepy star kid.

EDIT: I mean having not REALLY gone to see him as he was not real.

[Tony_Knightcrawler]

Lupus Canivus wrote...
 If this is true then  I will go on my knees and beg Bioware's forgiveness! It will also make the ending the MOST awesome ending in game history. They fooled us all........................................If its true

Um... please don't...

[Phobius9]

ixcruz wrote...

Phobius9 wrote...



Then there's the fact that the game dumps you back on-board the Normandy. How will the DLC activate once you've downloaded it? Click on 'Resume' and you get a message saying "Hey, wanna see how the game really ends lolololol?!?"?

Don't get me wrong, I have everything crossed for a DLC to finish the fight, but I'd be interested in people's thoughts as to how it will be implemented.

I'm guessing they'll make you play-through the final London mission (since you can restart the final mission by loading), do everything as you did before (or even change your mind) and the 'true' ending will kick off after that. 

Seems a hell of a risk. People could have saved over the top of that. I guess you could argue 'Well, sucks to be you then. You'll have to start earlier' but that seems a little...unfair. 

Dunno. My money is on it just starting immediatly after you hit Resume once you've downloaded the DLC.

[Syphirr]

Goikiu wrote...

Syphirr wrote...

Goikiu wrote...

 There is another issue about the end and the "theory".

If you think about it ME2 have got the same identical engine (and grafhic engine) of the ME3.
So, same identical engine, same dimension (for xbox 2 full dvds).
But... if i recall it correctly.... ME2 have got 2 mission special for each squad member outside the first two (miranda and jacob) as in ME3 you got Ashley/Kaidan and Vega. The others have got two mission each, one for finding, one for thrust.
ME2 has a lot of cerberus mission too and mission you can take scanning some planet.
and ME2 have a long mission story.

ME3 is too short.
We're talking about 7 or 10 N7 mission right?
Plus some little mission if you've got some dlc before, like Kasumi or Zaeed. But nothing more... and so, you got a story mission who isn't really that long... so we're missing something o_0 a lot i'd say.

(As ya know i'm not English so try to understand me) 

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think they only have the same engines in the case of the PS3.

Another thing to consider is that although there appeared to be a lot more content in 2 in your opinion, a lot of the enviroments were re-used (although obviously not to the same extent as ME1)

You need to pay attention to a lot of things.
As far as i know about gaming programming a Graphic Engine isn't something you change every games. It request a lot of money/time to be made and if you look about cinematic/dialogue they (me2 and me3) feel the same. They've untouched the HUD (weapon circle and power circle). They've changed some little thing in the general hud like how they show you Health and Granades.
The texture are generally changed, but not the Engine (as far as i know).
ME2 have surely got a lot more of missions but not ME3... as far as i can remember ME2 has more quest (planet you got missions) but most of em are shorter. With ME3 you got less missions but longer.

It's hard to see really if something is hidden or not... so i'm thinking about it.
Yes i can be completly wrong but we need to survive throught this... (this topic and this moment whit no info from BW). 

Ah, about the mini-game.
in ME3 you got the planet searching object mini-game.
Within ME2 you got the planet searching resources plus hacking and bypassing mini-game.

ME1 have the same as ME2 but resources where a lot different. 

This is a quote from BioWare on the PS3 version of mass effect 2:


"One of the first things you're going to see is improved graphics," explained game producer Jesse Houston on the BioWare podcast. "We actually created the engine for Mass Effect 3 and used that to make Mass Effect 2 PS3. So we took the content, the story and all of the other assets that made up Mass Effect 2 and we put it into the Mass Effect 3 engine." 
EDIT: realised this has kinda gone off topic, sorry

Modifié par Syphirr, 14 mars 2012 - 01:58 .

[Denethar]

I'd demand heads on a table if I were an EA stockholder if it is true. Talk about playing Russian Roulette.

[Goikiu]

Syphirr wrote...

Goikiu wrote...

Syphirr wrote...

Goikiu wrote...

 There is another issue about the end and the "theory".

If you think about it ME2 have got the same identical engine (and grafhic engine) of the ME3.
So, same identical engine, same dimension (for xbox 2 full dvds).
But... if i recall it correctly.... ME2 have got 2 mission special for each squad member outside the first two (miranda and jacob) as in ME3 you got Ashley/Kaidan and Vega. The others have got two mission each, one for finding, one for thrust.
ME2 has a lot of cerberus mission too and mission you can take scanning some planet.
and ME2 have a long mission story.

ME3 is too short.
We're talking about 7 or 10 N7 mission right?
Plus some little mission if you've got some dlc before, like Kasumi or Zaeed. But nothing more... and so, you got a story mission who isn't really that long... so we're missing something o_0 a lot i'd say.

(As ya know i'm not English so try to understand me) 

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think they only have the same engines in the case of the PS3.

Another thing to consider is that although there appeared to be a lot more content in 2 in your opinion, a lot of the enviroments were re-used (although obviously not to the same extent as ME1)

You need to pay attention to a lot of things.
As far as i know about gaming programming a Graphic Engine isn't something you change every games. It request a lot of money/time to be made and if you look about cinematic/dialogue they (me2 and me3) feel the same. They've untouched the HUD (weapon circle and power circle). They've changed some little thing in the general hud like how they show you Health and Granades.
The texture are generally changed, but not the Engine (as far as i know).
ME2 have surely got a lot more of missions but not ME3... as far as i can remember ME2 has more quest (planet you got missions) but most of em are shorter. With ME3 you got less missions but longer.

It's hard to see really if something is hidden or not... so i'm thinking about it.
Yes i can be completly wrong but we need to survive throught this... (this topic and this moment whit no info from BW). 

Ah, about the mini-game.
in ME3 you got the planet searching object mini-game.
Within ME2 you got the planet searching resources plus hacking and bypassing mini-game.

ME1 have the same as ME2 but resources where a lot different. 

This is a quote from BioWare on the PS3 version of mass effect 2:


"One of the first things you're going to see is improved graphics," explained game producer Jesse Houston on the BioWare podcast. "We actually created the engine for Mass Effect 3 and used that to make Mass Effect 2 PS3. So we took the content, the story and all of the other assets that made up Mass Effect 2 and we put it into the Mass Effect 3 engine." 
EDIT: realised this has kinda gone off topic, sorry

I play with my Xbox
I Haven't seen any changes o_o maybe it's me who cannot see those chages  

[frajerik]

Anything from 4chan cant be taken serious so....

[Ravax]

I would LOVE to hear Drew Karpshyn's take on this... Seeing as he created most of the lore, i would love to see how he would react to the way ME3's lore was spun out of control with the endings here... (So he can support our cause and/or verify to us that the indoctrination theory is true!!)

[Tailen]

JulienJaden wrote...

variobunz wrote...

"We have some really great multiplayer content and some really great single-player content coming over the air and their feedback will become part of how we design that," Hudson added.

Interseting.

Is that so, Casey? Well, our feedback is this: Give us what you, personally, word for word, promised: An ending that takes our choices into account, rather than A, B, C. That's your promise. [...]

So I'm seeing people quote him on the "A, B, or C" line and compare it to the 3 choices you're given at the end.  Convenient for the dissenters, but I can't let that be said without sharing the very next lines of that same quote:

It’s not even in any way like the traditional game endings, where you can say how many endings there are or whether you got ending A, B, or C.  It’s more like there are some really obvious things that are different and then lots and lots of smaller things, lots of things about who lives and who dies, civilizations that rose and fell, all the way down to individual characters. That becomes the state of where you left your galaxy.

Also from here:  
http://www.gameinfor...PostPageIndex=2 

I really don't see how people don't feel like the "state of [...] your galaxy" wasn't the culmination of their choices.  "Who lives and who dies, civilizations that rose and fell" -- I can guarantee those vary greatly from one person's final game save to the next.  Wrapped up in a Hollywood-style popcorn movie ending or not, it happened all the same.

The entire franchise is essentially "choose A or B... sometimes C", and how you stop the reapers shouldn't be any different.  He's talking about the final state of your galaxy.

You had a hand in that.

Anyway, I just don't want to see that quote thrown around a bunch out of context :innocent: